Gun Control

[marine13]

Yes, I hope I would do all I could, short of killing, to stop someone from harming another. I once held a man on the ground while the man he intended to kill escaped. Would I use something other than a gun to stop one who was about to kill? I am a sinful man and do not predict what I might do in a moment of passion. What I do know, as a rational man, I have made a firm decision not to own or use a gun to kill another human being.

Reference was made earlier to the war against Hitler. I wonder what would have happened had there not been a World War II? There was no war to stop Mao in China. During his time in power an estimated 40 to 70 million people died from preventable causes. What if there had been a war? I am not sure war would have made things better.

Many Catholics and other Christians in China during the 20th Century could have saved their families from suffering and death by just saying: “Belief in God is superstition.” What would have been our advise to them?

In Detroit, Devin Taylor, 21, is facing a first-degree murder charge in the death of a three year old child, Aarie Berry, who was killed July 10 when a bullet pierced the front of her family’s apartment, located in a multi-unit house on the city’s east side. Would a gun have saved Aarie Berry? Would better control of guns prevented this death of a child? What about Devin Taylor? What if he had not been able to purchase or steel a gun? Is it really evil to use multiple means to prevent violence and death?

So, using your logic there should also be restrictions on knifes, bats, cars, and anything else that is commonly used in an act of violence. Just because the use of a tool is sometimes abused does not mean that the tool should be banned or made less available to those who use it responsibily. As I stated before evil acts of violence will happen regardless of the availability of a gun. Tighter, more restrictive, gun control laws will only take a good defensive option away from law abiding citizens a give a greater advantage to criminals.

As to the part where you mentioned WWII… are you suggesting that it would have been morally superior for the United States and its allies to have ignored Hitler and the Nazi’s and all the evil they were forcing onto others?

 

[kykid]

Most gun owners will never, in anger, fire a shot at another.

I don’t own a hand gun, but do own rifles and shotguns for hunting purposes only. They can be used in self-defense, however, if the need arises. I would have no problem shooting another who is threatening my family with harm.

I personally would have no problem with a 48 hour waiting period for a hand gun purchase. This would enable the retailer to do a thorough background check and hopefully would prevent crimes of passion or crimes perpetrated by those with a mental illness.

 

[bigfootbob]

Most gun owners will never, in anger, fire a shot at another.

I don’t own a hand gun, but do own rifles and shotguns for hunting purposes only. They can be used in self-defense, however, if the need arises. I would have no problem shooting another who is threatening my family with harm.

I personally would have no problem with a 48 hour waiting period for a hand gun purchase. This would enable the retailer to do a thorough background check and hopefully would prevent crimes of passion or crimes perpetrated by those with a mental illness.

I personally wouldn’t have a problem with a waiting period either, but I can’t see anything in a background check that can’t be done instantly. In my opinion, a waiting period will not really do much for mental illnesses, and crimes of passion where someone buys a gun would also be very low either way.

 

[Newbie2]

I personally wouldn’t have a problem with a waiting period either, but I can’t see anything in a background check that can’t be done instantly. In my opinion, a waiting period will not really do much for mental illnesses, and crimes of passion where someone buys a gun would also be very low either way.

When we were at the airport trying to get on our flight when our son lost ALL his identification, they were able to get all his information from the feds in a matter of about 10 minutes.

I can see having a two or three day waiting (potential cooling off) period, that makes some sense, but more so for anyone who gets angry and wants to shoot someone rather than the fact that access to records is so slow.

 

[tommcguire]

Proposals for alternative ways of acting are good. All decisions to use violence whether in war, or in self defense are based on human assumptions. Assumptions are not truth!

In the news yesterday the City of Detroit it was reported that the mertro area experiences nearly one murder everyday. In the last two years I can remember only two occasions where someone with a registered gun killed an attacker in self defense. Statistically insignificant, would you not agree?

I can remember many children killed as a result of a drive by shooting or a gun battle in the street. I have experienced someone firing a gun on my street in the middle of the afternoon. I make the assumption that most people posses guns in the city. If you were me would you want to find some way to end the unnecessary violent taking of human life? I assume that more gun ownership will not solve the problem. I assume that just as we have many restrictions on who and how one can drive a car, so we need more restrictions on who and how one uses a fire arm. I look to the Detroit southern border, Canada where there are very strict gun controls. One must take classes before owning a gun. And a huge difference in the number of people killed in urban areas as a result of gun fire. Would more gun control not be a possible a good thing for Detroit?

 

[searching04]

No problem. Won’t touch your guns. In the catechism there is a section on just war or using force. One of the conditions is likelyhood of success. There is no way anyone will be successfull in taking on a modern democratic governnet. Also another principle is that the costs cannot outweigh the victory. There would be a huge bloodbath unimaginable if a militant group tried to start a civil war in a modern democratic government.

I would take JP IIs approach, which by the way worked against the communists in Poland.

This just caught my attention. As a soldier, there are myriad ways you can tackle just about anything. Ask the Russians from Afgahnistan and our troops there as well.

If it is a Demicratic government, then it won’t use the military against its civilians, though I think this President would toss the Constitution in a heartbeat. Against a militant group? Maybe. Bloodbath possible? Yep, but so was the American Revolution. Freedom isn’t free, but it sure as hell is worth dying for.

 

[marine13]

Proposals for alternative ways of acting are good. All decisions to use violence whether in war, or in self defense are based on human assumptions. Assumptions are not truth!

In the news yesterday the City of Detroit it was reported that the mertro area experiences nearly one murder everyday. In the last two years I can remember only two occasions where someone with a registered gun killed an attacker in self defense. Statistically insignificant, would you not agree?

I can remember many children killed as a result of a drive by shooting or a gun battle in the street. I have experienced someone firing a gun on my street in the middle of the afternoon. I make the assumption that most people posses guns in the city. If you were me would you want to find some way to end the unnecessary violent taking of human life? I assume that more gun ownership will not solve the problem. I assume that just as we have many restrictions on who and how one can drive a car, so we need more restrictions on who and how one uses a fire arm. I look to the Detroit southern border, Canada where there are very strict gun controls. One must take classes before owning a gun. And a huge difference in the number of people killed in urban areas as a result of gun fire. Would more gun control not be a possible a good thing for Detroit?

As it has been said numerous times before in this thread, gun control will not stop criminals from obtaining an using guns. Will criminals take those classes? No. Do they care about responsible gun ownership. No. Do criminals care if they obtain a gun legally. No. Gun control laws will only hinder law abiding citizens ability to effectively defend themselves against criminals who wish to do them harm. So your first point about guns used in self defense is moot. But to humor you, would it have been better if those two occassions where someone killed their attacker in self defense changed into their deaths because they were unable to defend themselves? Would their deaths be morally superior to their living after defending themself? And shame on you for degrading those victims of crimes to simple statistics.

The part where you said “assumptions are not truth” I am not sure of your point. Are you saying that the Church’s stance on the use of self-defense or just war is only their assumption? And if so are you saying that those who choose to defend themselves or another have sinned? Because if you are then you are departing from the the teachings of the Church and spreading falsehood no matter how well-meaning your intentions may be.

Furthermore, your point about restrictions on driving only back up my point about gun control. Cars are tools. Restrictions on cars does not stop people from using them illegally to hurt or kill others. Guns are tools. Restrictions on guns will not stop people from using them illegally to hurt or kill others.

Also, you haven’t answered my question about your post on WWII.

 

[tommcguire]

Would the roads be safer if government did not require driver education?

Human decisions determine if and when a nation goes to war. World War II was no exception. The assumptions behind the decisions to take nations to war are not truth. Alternatives may have been possible to war, even WWII.

My assumptions may be wrong. I live with the danger of guns out of control. Is it possible there is an alternative to the gun violence I now live with? There is no shortage of guns in the hands of citizens in Detroit. Not all unnecessary gun violence is committed by criminals. Many deaths are caused by unwise use of guns. Is there no way to find a way to improve gun safety and reduce the gun caused death rates? Can Canada be a model? Is the Catholic teaching pro life? Can there be no possible way to view gun control as pro life?

God have mercy on us!

 

[AHapka]

Human decisions determine if and when a nation goes to war. World War II was no exception. The assumptions behind the decisions to take nations to war are not truth. Alternatives may have been possible to war, even WWII.

Could you please suggest to us what some of those alternatives may have been?

 

[tommcguire]

I am not an historian and have no specific grand scheme that could have prevented WW II. What I do know is that the United States did not go to war to stop Mao in China. Much greater suffering took place during his days in power than during the days of Hitler’s power. Was that a better alternative than war? Historians in the distant future will have to judge.

As a follower of Jesus who revealed God as community of Father-Son-Holy Spirit, I believe a new way of being human was revealed. The Trinitarian God shows us a way of being at one with each other. An at oneness that is the reign of God. The Gospels show us a way of life that will bring about this at oneness: “thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven”. Have we even begun to live that way of life as Jesus’ followers?

Jesus came to heal not destroy. We as His followers are we called to heal? How do we heal with a gun? How do we come to the fullness of life when we rely on means of death to defend life?

My Dad just died at age 103. His life was a witness to peace making. He never owned a gun. He and mother taught me and my 13 siblings to always look for non violent ways to solve problems. He said over and over again: “If you want peace let it begin with you.” All his life he called us to conversion, to a transformation into a person who could say, as Paul says: “I live now not I but Christ lives in me.” My imagination cannot see Christ picking up a gun to shoot and kill his enemy. So if Christ lives in me, how can I pick up a gun and kill my enemy?

 

[Calgar]

An unarmed man can only flee from evil. Evil is not defeated by fleeing from it.

 

[Calgar]

Is physical violence the only way to confront evil? Does Jesus offer alternatives? What would happen if we all took seriously Jesus’ way of life? Would the Kingdom of God be closer to reality than it is now? Jesus gives life! How does the Christian share life with the sinner? Would guns to kill people be under control if we lived more peacefully with each other? I do not own a gun, will never own a gun, nor would I ever fire a gun to kill another human being. Does that mean I do not do ever resort to violence in word or deed? No I have committed sins. I ask myself: What violence did I bring into the world by my sin of violence against another?

You are aware that Jesus told us to get a sword, right? Are you also are aware of what he did to the men he found selling items in the temple?

Violence is not a sin. Straighten yourself out. If you are a submissive victim that’s fine. I am not, and that’s okay too.

 

[Birdpreacher]

You are aware that Jesus told us to get a sword, right? Are you also are aware of what he did to the men he found selling items in the temple?

Violence is not a sin. Straighten yourself out. If you are a submissive victim that’s fine. I am not, and that’s okay too.

YeH BROTHER I LOVE ME SOME RiGHTEOUS VIOLENCE, Hey you gonna see Machine gun preacher? Ghandi was on tv but I was like, hey, why i wanna see that when Machine Gun Preacher be at the cinema.

 

[AHapka]

I am not an historian and have no specific grand scheme that could have prevented WW II. What I do know is that the United States did not go to war to stop Mao in China. Much greater suffering took place during his days in power than during the days of Hitler’s power. Was that a better alternative than war? Historians in the distant future will have to judge.

I never claimed you were a historian. I would simply like you to give your best guess of what you think should have been done. No avoiding the question

 

[Calgar]

YeH BROTHER I LOVE ME SOME RiGHTEOUS VIOLENCE, Hey you gonna see Machine gun preacher? Ghandi was on tv but I was like, hey, why i wanna see that when Machine Gun Preacher be at the cinema.

lol.

You go for it then.

 

[tommcguire]

No human decision is perfect. The decision to use violence as a nation or as an individual is imperfect. The consequences of killing human beings have eternal consequences. Nothing one can be done that will restore a human lives that has been taken. Evil is defeated already in Christ Jesus, not by the killing of other human beings. I do not judge the one who takes the life of another in offense or defense. God is the judge. What Jesus calls me to do is give witness to the good news of salvation, to invite everyone to the banquet of eternal life. How can I effectively do that with a gun?

 

[AHapka]

No human decision is perfect. The decision to use violence as a nation or as an individual is imperfect. The consequences of killing human beings have eternal consequences. Nothing one can be done that will restore a human lives that has been taken. Evil is defeated already in Christ Jesus, not by the killing of other human beings. I do not judge the one who takes the life of another in offense or defense. God is the judge. What Jesus calls me to do is give witness to the good news of salvation, to invite everyone to the banquet of eternal life. How can I effectively do that with a gun?

You are still not answering the question of what you would have done with WWII. Please quit avoiding it.

 

[tommcguire]

I cannot answer the question about WWII. I read the Gospel thinking about today. Here is the Gospel from Friday, Oct 13th. It raises more questions for all of us.

**7 'Alas for you because you build tombs for the prophets, the people your ancestors killed!

48 In this way you both witness to what your ancestors did and approve it; they did the killing, you do the building.

49 'And that is why the Wisdom of God said, "I will send them prophets and apostles; some they will slaughter and persecute,

50 so that this generation will have to answer for every prophet’s blood that has been shed since the foundation of the world,

51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who perished between the altar and the Temple." Yes, I tell you, this generation will have to answer for it all.

52 ‘Alas for you lawyers who have taken away the key of knowledge! You have not gone in yourselves and have prevented others from going in who wanted to.’

53 When he left there, the scribes and the Pharisees began a furious attack on him and tried to force answers from him on innumerable questions,

54 lying in wait to catch him out in something he might say. **

Are we called to be prophets and apostles, in baptism we become priests, kings and prophets in Christ? Are we the ones Jesus is talking about being killed? Will our generation be held accountable for the killing of the prophets and apostles? Sister Dorothy Stang was shot and killed as she went to a meeting defending the people and trees of the Amazon in Brazil? Are we called to take the risks she took? I think guns for defense are a way of avoiding what Jesus calls us to. One way to judge our own actions is: Do the powers that be attack us like they attacked Jesus? Anyone who follows the call to non violence will experience attack from others. Those who support gun control will experience attack from others. Is it possible for those of us who follow Jesus Christ to recognize that we can take different positions on gun control and yet be following Jesus?